Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Come next Tuesday night, we’ll get a resolution (let’s hope) to a great ongoing battle of 2012: not just the Presidential election between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, but the one between the pundits trying to analyze that race with their guts and a new breed of statistics gurus trying to forecast it with data.

In Election 2012 as seen by the pundits–political journalists on the trail, commentators in cable-news studios–the campaign is a jump ball. There’s a slight lead for Mitt Romney in national polls and slight leads for Barack Obama in swing-state polls, and no good way of predicting next Tuesday’s outcome beyond flipping a coin. ...

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Can Bill Gates buy a decommissioned Russian air craft carrier for his personal use?

Well clearly there's a process. I know some restored tanks are capable of firing their main guns. Jacques Littlefield has over 150 military vehicles in various states of restoration. (Including main battle tanks that are only a generation out of date)

Similarly you can buy former combat aircraft. As I recall, in the US the have to be certified that they have been demilitarized -- and that this is a very well defined process.

In 1958, the Confederate Air Force (now the Commemorative Air Force) had a couple of Bearcats. At that time, most National Guard units probably didn't have planes as capable as this. Though I'm pretty sure the CAF versions didn't have hard points and military level avionics.

NOLA presents a completely different problem. It really is a city built below sea level at this point. (Well, technically it was built above sea level, but it was a castle built in a swamp, so naturally it sank.)

NOLA should be reengineered as a type of American Venice or Amsterdam. Much of Miami should be as well. The lower lying areas of the NEC could use some work in that regard too, but a surge protection wall on Manhattan Bay would do wonders as well.

Of course, you'd have to explain to Americans that infrastructure costs money in order to do that.

(The idea of moving people off the coasts is pure wishcasting. Humans always live near water. It's in the damned DNA.)

A myth, as far as I can tell. Most presidents are in their 50s or 60s when they take office. Most people in their 50s or 60s will look far more aged eight years down the line than younger people over that same timespan.

Somewhat true, but Bill Clinton (for example) looked much better years after getting out of office (and still looks better) than he did at the end of his term. Being President is really hard on a person.

GQ: How old do you think the Earth is?
Marco Rubio: I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

GQ: How old do you think the Earth is?
Marco Rubio: I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

The issue with this is that SCIENCE TEACHERS shouldn't be forced to teach creationism, or religion, but that's what some people on the right are advocating.

It really is a city built below sea level at this point. (Well, technically it was built above sea level, but it was a castle built in a swamp, so naturally it sank.)

no. it was founded on high ground at a bend in the river, high ground that doesn't flood even in hurricanes. its the french quarter. all the land around it is at or below sea level except for a strip along the river going north, which is called uptown, where the middle class and well-to-do were concentrated until post WWII spread of the city. that spread is mostly below sea level, especially mid-city (some parts are 8 ft. below sea level) and most of the land in the northern part of the city, including lakeview, which got some of the worst of the flooding when the levee was breached during katrina; and east new orleans, which got terrible flooding also from the levee breaches.
neither the french quarter nor uptown were flooded after katrina.

no. it was founded on high ground at a bend in the river, high ground that doesn't flood even in hurricanes. its the french quarter. all the land around it is at or below sea level except for a strip along the river going north, which is called uptown, where the middle class and well-to-do were concentrated until post WWII spread of the city. that spread is mostly below sea level, especially mid-city (some parts are 8 ft. below sea level) and most of the land in the northern part of the city, including lakeview, which got some of the worst of the flooding when the levee was breached during katrina; and east new orleans, which got terrible flooding also from the levee breaches.

Fair enough, but that's like arguing that Atlanta is still a city built around Terminus.

Somewhat true, but Bill Clinton (for example) looked much better years after getting out of office (and still looks better) than he did at the end of his term. Being President is really hard on a person.

True about Clinton, though the 180 turnaround in his eating and conditioning habits after his heart attacks mostly account for that. If he hadn't made that turnaround, he'd be pushing up daisies somewhere in Arkansas instead of jetting around the globe.

Well clearly there's a process. I know some restored tanks are capable of firing their main guns. Jacques Littlefield has over 150 military vehicles in various states of restoration. (Including main battle tanks that are only a generation out of date)

Well, yes. In the real world, where decisions have practical consequences, there's obviously a process. The dead red fastball down the pipe answer is "no, Bill Gates can not purchase a warship," unless it's been through "the process" and is no longer an actual warship.

There exists a scale of armaments. It starts with maybe the least dangerous "arms" you can imagine; say Lassus with a mid-sized stick. A cudgel, even in poorly developed arms such as Lassus' is still an armament. And I think we're all pretty solidly on the same ground that everyone has the natural right to carry around a mid-sized stick, right?

On the other end of the arms scale are nukes. Everyone is pretty much agreed that I don't get my own nuclear device. My natural right to bear arms apparently ends at your fear that I will take out half of an urban center if Bill Hahn pisses me off. So there's a limit to this 2nd Amendment protection to bear arms. It lies somewhere between Tim with a stick and Sam with a suitcase nuke.

The question - the *only* question - is where we draw the line. And no matter how much people like Joe want to argue that the line isn't arbitrarily drawn, it is in fact arbitrary. Somewhere to the right of muskets, somewhere to the left of grenade launchers, with a lot of sturm und drang about "assault rifles" and large capacity clips for hand guns. Joe wants to play Potter Stewart on the question and beg out that he knows it when he sees it, but I think rational people can agree that that argument is a load of unadulterated ####.

True about Clinton, though the 180 turnaround in his eating and conditioning habits after his heart attacks mostly account for that.

I am not sure he could have made the same turnaround in lifestyle as President though.

Sam - Snow Crash by Neil Stephenson. In the book one of the Villains actually has bought a US Aircraft carrier in the dystopian future. And the villains "Minions" have an extreme case of glossolalia. It all makes sense and is a really good book.

And I think we're all pretty solidly on the same ground that everyone has the natural right to carry around a mid-sized stick, right?

Many years ago I was the night manager at a gas station in a sketchy part of town. One night I had to call the cops when some loony carrying a mid-sized stick kept approaching customers at the pumps, asking (or maybe 'asking') for money. He ended up going to jail for a few weeks, and then came back and repeated the process.

Which one is your favorite? i have a buffalo gun rifle that could knock you on your 8ss from a half mile away.
Oldest? revolutionary war
First? 22 rifle
Last? shotgun from my sons as a present a year ago
Most used? 20 gauge single shot shotgun to handle varmints
Least Used? when my brother died i inherited his 8 gauge goose gun. that sumb8tch has a mean kick. it's a d8mn cannon. took it out once and that was that

No idea. But I recommend the novel, if only because the main character is named Hiro Protagonist. There is some silly bits and metaphysical nonsense, but a fun novel. To turn it back to politics it does feel a bit like a Libertarian utopia with the central government largely gone and people able to become members in pocket nations and such (though I am not saying it is in fact what Libertarians want or anything like that - I'll let them tell us their feelings).

Many years ago I was the night manager at a gas station in a sketchy part of town. One night I had to call the cops when some loony carrying a mid-sized stick kept approaching customers at the pumps, asking (or maybe 'asking') for money.

He wouldn't have been able to get away with that if everybody was carrying a stick.

GQ: How old do you think the Earth is?
Marco Rubio: I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians

And Rubio's a Catholic! The Catholic Church fully accepts the state of science on the age of the universe. Aquinas, reason and faith are complementary, perfectly normal Catholicism. He's pandering well beyond his church's doctrine.

Rubio does seem to be lining himself up as the "let's run on the exact same platform, but with a Latino!" candidate. He figures he can shove Ryan out of the way by being a better standard-bearer for the hard-right of the GOP. Then he just needs to beat out people who are telling either the social base or the donor class things they don't want to hear. That's a pretty good bet for winning the nomination, though it's also a pretty good bet for once again running a Republican general campaign that underperforms the fundamentals by a million votes or more.

Wade Hampton was able to equip a larger than brigade sized force out of his own pocket in 1860. Including IIRC two batteries of artillery.

He hadn't done so before 1860, but there was no practical impediment on his buying them.

Also during the civil war there were cases of unit commanders buying better than standard issue arms for their units. Wilder's brigade comes to mind.

Was Hampton's purchase before succession? Obviously it was after the law of Union wasn't relevant. He was also in the militia at some point as well, don't know the time line of all of that.

Active soldiers buying their own weapons at the time generally had government consent, I'm sure private security contractors like Academi are allowed to have some pretty impressive weapons today, just as militias or privateers could back then.

I think part of the problem is that at the time it was completely impractical for normal civilians to own more than pistols/rifles/shotguns, especially outside formal militia groups, so it never seemed important to make laws against it; they may not for foreseen small arms capable of doing the destruction of a grenade launcher or even fully automatic AK. Making laws against those common civilian guns of the time was less popular as they were seen as more essential tools of the American lifestyle at the time.

Am I the only secular non-theist on the board here that doesn't find Rubio's answer to that question particularly vexing? If more politicians would answer such questions with what amounts to "not my job, dude; go ask a scientist" we'd be better off with science policy, right?

To turn it back to politics it does feel a bit like a Libertarian utopia with the central government largely gone and people able to become members in pocket nations and such (though I am not saying it is in fact what Libertarians want or anything like that - I'll let them tell us their feelings).

This was a pretty much universal feature of cyberpunk literature from that era-- but it was typically a dystopian rather than utopian imaginary, where corporate power and digital information technologies rendered national allegiances obsolete. Slightly OT, but William Gibson's recent collection of essays (Distrust that Particular Flavor) contains some nice bits on the subject. I don't remember that aspect of Snow Crash particularly well though, so I could be getting it wrong.

True about Clinton, though the 180 turnaround in his eating and conditioning habits after his heart attacks mostly account for that.

I am not sure he could have made the same turnaround in lifestyle as President though.

Well, we would have likely seen a lot more of Vice President Gore if that second one had taken place while Clinton was still in office. It took Eisenhower a full five months to resume his former pace after his heart attack in 1955, and you can't be assuming full presidential duties while recovering from one.

Am I the only secular non-theist on the board here that doesn't find Rubio's answer to that question particularly vexing? If more politicians would answer such questions with what amounts to "not my job, dude; go ask a scientist" we'd be better off with science policy, right?

It's fine as long as he would stick to it. It also depends on what sort of scientists he'd be hiring.

Am I the only secular non-theist on the board here that doesn't find Rubio's answer to that question particularly vexing? If more politicians would answer such questions with what amounts to "not my job, dude; go ask a scientist" we'd be better off with science policy, right?

As a stand alone answer it doesn't bother me a whole bunch, but in the context of the modern GOP and its full on hate towards science and other learned folk* it does not exactly reassure me. At the danger of inciting Ray or David it seems sort of dog whistle innocuous to most low information voters while still connecting with the believers.

* Yes the liberals have their issues with science also, but not on the same level that the modern GOP does, which to too bad I think.

Am I the only secular non-theist on the board here that doesn't find Rubio's answer to that question particularly vexing? If more politicians would answer such questions with what amounts to "not my job, dude; go ask a scientist" we'd be better off with science policy, right?

Except that he refers theologians before he refers to science. It's an obvious dog whistle.

Am I the only secular non-theist on the board here that doesn't find Rubio's answer to that question particularly vexing? If more politicians would answer such questions with what amounts to "not my job, dude; go ask a scientist" we'd be better off with science policy, right?

He's not exactly saying that. For example, if he's asked, What's the moon made of? and he says "Rock, I think, maybe some ice.. I dunno ask a Scientist" then I agree with you. But it's as if he said instead "I don't know, it could be rock, or cheese; there are many theories, and all of them should be taught."

Science is science, and religion is religion. As Matt in 9024 points out, the Catholic Church understands this. Rubio appears to be equivocating the two - maybe the Earth really is 6000 years old, and fossil records are tools of the Devil.

It's fine as long as he would stick to it. It also depends on what sort of scientists he'd be hiring.

Sure. Of course. And should Marc Rubio run for president, patient observers should be able to deduce what sort of people he'd hire from his campaign rhetoric and his choice of campaign advisers. But I guess, until such time as we are presented with something damning in that regard, I don't see the point in trying to damn him on the issue. Perhaps, being from metro Atlanta/Georgia, I'm more inured to the religious crazy than some. I deal with Paul Broun on a regular basis; my state House GOP caucus just had a meeting where they went over Barack Obama's _mind control techniques._ ON THE STATE'S DIME! So maybe when I see a GOP/TP pol answer the question in an even semi-lucid manner I call that a win. It's possible.

Regardless, until such time as Rubio says something worse than that quoted bit up there, his stance on the age of the Earth is low on my priority list. I'd be much more concerned with his "Hi, I'm Paul Ryan with a deeper tan" economic theory, personally.

rubio is working to avoid alienating the evangelicals who vote in the primaries and caucuses. that anyone look at this from any other perspective is just silly.

the gop needs to find a candidate who can do the president reagan wink and a smile that yes he said things to the religious right but other voters didn't believe that was the candidate's actual view(s)

but i am surprised that folks here are already tracking 2016. lot's to do right now.

Least Used? when my brother died i inherited his 8 gauge goose gun. that sumb8tch has a mean kick. it's a d8mn cannon. took it out once and that was that

Wow. Good friend of mine's father left him a 10 gauge goose gun, and that was a painful gun to shoot despite weighing approximately as much as Orson Welles' casket. I can't imagine dealing with the punishment of an 8 gauge for birds. Heck, geese spend lots of time on the ground, just shoot the thing with a rifle and call it a day.

the question of creation, which is what Rubio was answering, *is* a theosophical question, not a scientific question.

The question of creation is but the age of the universe isn't. It is a known quantity with pretty well set boundaries. Now, the bounds encompass hundreds of millions of years. However, 6000 years ago is an incorrect answer.

Many years ago I was the night manager at a gas station in a sketchy part of town. One night I had to call the cops when some loony carrying a mid-sized stick kept approaching customers at the pumps, asking (or maybe 'asking') for money.

He wouldn't have been able to get away with that if everybody was carrying a stick.

rubio is working to avoid alienating the evangelicals who vote in the primaries and caucuses. that anyone look at this from any other perspective is just silly.

The problem, Harv, is that a guy who's willing to pander to the evangelicals before the election is also potentially a guy who's willing to pander to them when he's picking a new director of the NSF or looking at funding requests from the CDC. Particularly if he doesn't think any of that stuff is all that important, in the grand scheme of things. Kissing ass becomes a habit, and it's the president's job to use the most current knowledge science has to offer to serve the evangelicals' best interest - whether they like it or not.

Regarding the previous page, I'd make a bet right now Christie runs, and runs well for 2016. I honestly don't think anyone at all will care how fat he is. Hard to say NOW he's the presumptive nominee, but if you were calling for a favorite RIGHT NOW, I'd say he's it. Lots can - and will - change, granted.

I think bunyon's salient point is that theologians shouldn't be involved with a science-based discussion of the age of the universe. They can come in when we get to "Why is there anything instead of nothing?" and questions like that.

Am I the only secular non-theist on the board here that doesn't find Rubio's answer to that question particularly vexing? If more politicians would answer such questions with what amounts to "not my job, dude; go ask a scientist" we'd be better off with science policy, right?

I'm not the least big religious and don't have a problem with the answer.

To go farther personally, I think "What is Earth?" is a fairly complex question. Is Earth simply the ball made up of the matter from a couple of billions years ago? Is it part of the singularity from which all the matter, farther back came from? Did a lifeless ball of stone and hydrocarbons become Earth when life came into existence? When humanity came to exist? Or when humanity reached the point at which we could start to see how our existence on this globe started to pull back the veil of the universe, even if we've only slightly done so? Is Earth a construct above and beyond this planet orbiting the sun or is it no greater than the sum of its collective parts? Different belief systems see these issues and they're not always well-defined - one could very well argue that the belief that Earth was created 6000 years ago doesn't accurately refer to a physical creation, but instead, point to the idea that our planet became something more as our civilization expanded rapidly, to create a world in which most people are no linked on a truly global level rather than isolated tribes. Or one could argue that we haven't yet completed this idea of Earth.

It's not an interesting question and one I don't think I or anyone is qualified to answer for everyone. Let the theologians discuss it. If someone asks you what your wife/husband/significant other is, do you answer "an organic organism composed primarily of carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen?" Was the entity that is identified as Dan Szymborski created 34 years ago, a few years after when Dan Szymborski realized his existence, or 14 billion years ago, when the substances that make up Dan Szymborski emerged from the expansion of a singularity, or from something that we don't know yet?

None of these are easy questions to answer and I think it's generally silly to ask a politician.

rubio is working to avoid alienating the evangelicals who vote in the primaries and caucuses. that anyone look at this from any other perspective is just silly.

The problem, Harv, is that a guy who's willing to pander to the evangelicals before the election is also potentially a guy who's willing to pander to them when he's picking a new director of the NSF or looking at funding requests from the CDC. Particularly if he doesn't think any of that stuff is all that important, in the grand scheme of things.

Stage 1: Pander to the angry white loonies in the primaries.

Stage 2: Pretend that what you said in the primaries didn't mean anything when the general election comes around.

Stage 3: Get elected.

Stage 4: Claim that you have a mandate to enact the policies you campaigned on in the primaries.

Neat trick if you can pull it off. Fortunately that Stage 3 proved to be the hard part for the Etch-a-Sketch candidate. You can't fool all of the people all of the time, and after the 5th or 6th re-invention people begin to figure out which shell the pea is lying under.

None of these are easy questions to answer and I think it's generally silly to ask a politician.

Well I certainly agree with this, but doesn't it make the answering of the question with a great deal of rigidity by a politician, especially in the service of placating a particular constituency, even sillier?

It's not an interesting question and one I don't think I or anyone is qualified to answer for everyone. Let the theologians discuss it. If someone asks you what your wife/husband/significant other is, do you answer "an organic organism composed primarily of carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen?"

The question was "How old do you think the Earth is?" The equivalent question would be "How old is your wife?" Neither of these are theological questions.

Well I certainly agree with this, but doesn't it make the answering of the question with a great deal of rigidity by a politician, especially in the service of placating a particular constituency, even sillier?

Well, yeah. But that's the point. Rubio's answer is hardly one with "a great deal of rigidity" and it's not even obviously pandering to a particular constituency. Hell, if he's pandering to anyone with that answer he's pandering to the evangelical LEFT, not the evangelical RIGHT. He didn't even address the issue of "creation" in a way that indicates he was trying to placate/dog whistle Young Earth Creationists. In fact, just the opposite. He throws in, unbidden, that bit about "seven days or seven ages." That's the general position of faith taken by the Christian left on the subject. It posits that 1) the world is millions of years old, 2) evolution is the primary means of adaptation of life to environment, and 3) this is all part of God's plan and creation, which is told by allegory in Genesis (which shouldn't be taken as literally true in the sense of "days.")

Sam - Snow Crash by Neil Stephenson. In the book one of the Villains actually has bought a US Aircraft carrier in the dystopian future. And the villains "Minions" have an extreme case of glossolalia. It all makes sense and is a really good book.

I think you'll find it's Neal Stephenson. I'm only comfortable being this pedantic because I haven't actually read Snow Crash. But now I think I will, the Baroque Cycle and Anathem are two of my favourite books but for some reason I can't recall Stephenson's other books all sounded like they wouldn't be my cup of tea. I think it is time to sip one and find out!

1984. last day of deer season. about 3:30 pm on a sunday and we have one tag still to fill. we are walking one of my farms and i send the boys to walk a small patch of grass which i sense is a great tuck away spot for a smart deer who has evaded shots now for a week

i am parallel to them about 100 yards off

the boys ate griping nonstop about having to walk a patch no bigger than 10 in diameter when a big buck leaps out literally as my one boy walks on top of him. he falls down and his brother shoots and misses. the first boy recovers and takes his shot and that's another miss

my sons were between me and the deer but i have a hunch and hustle through the tall grass to get on top of the ditch edge (had a ditch dug to drain water off the property)

my hunch pays off as the deer is coming like a freight train having circled around but i lose sight as he enters the same big marsh grass so i am ready but no good idea where he will exit to jump the ditch and escape for good

and then i see a flash and the gun comes up and as he leaps the ditch i squeeze off and the buck crashes off the other side of the ditch

my sons go nuts at me bringing him down and insist on pacing it off several times. when they tell it gets longer every year but i figure it was 90-100 yards with a 12 ga shotgun slug with the deer in full jump over a ditch so the buck was midair. and it was not full profile

i use that story all the time to explain the power of persistence and anticipation

it may not have been my best shot ever but it was one of my best combos of thinking, planning and reacting

It wasn't an answer. It was Rubio dancing as fast as he could so as to NOT answer it. He didn't want to offend anyone so he ran off at the mouth for 165 words (per Large Monk and MS Word word count), talking about GDP and theologians and eras and everything else he could throw in. The only thing he left out was the Chewbacca defense.

I think a pol's ability to think, their willingness to pander, and their adherence to dogma, are relevant issues when you are electing someone. So if someone were to ask Rubio, point blank, if he agreed with the Young Earth believers who say the planet is only 6,000 or so years old, or if he accepts scientific evidence that it is billions of years old, I would not consider that an unreasonable question, and I would want to hear what he had to say. The same goes for whether he accepts the scientific theory of evolution, and whether he believes States can, or should, mandate that science classes teach creationism.

i use that story all the time to explain the power of persistence and anticipation

The last time I went deer hunting, my friend brought a bottle of slivovice. By the time the deer came near us, I couldn't hit it even though it was about 100 meters away. I think my friend had good anticipation to bring the bottle.

My mind completly blocked out (until the other day) that Gene Kelly was even in "Inherit the Wind", and that after 2 hours of making (or letting then make themselves) the religious nutjobs look stupid...Spencer Tracy gave 'the other side' some lip too.

He throws in, unbidden, that bit about "seven days or seven ages." That's the general position of faith taken by the Christian left on the subject. It posits that 1) the world is millions of years old, 2) evolution is the primary means of adaptation of life to environment, and 3) this is all part of God's plan and creation, which is told by allegory in Genesis (which shouldn't be taken as literally true in the sense of "days.")

Is the Catholic Church the "Christian left" nowadays? Rubio is a Catholic. The Church teaches that the Bible is not incompatible with the Earth's age of 4.6 billion years. Period.

What do you guys mean about other "ages of the Earth"? Earth is the planet we live on. The data we have shows it formed 4.6 billion years ago, give or take 100 million years.

If you want to talk sprituality, have at it. But the Earth has an age. As does your wife. If you're not man enough to say it in front of her, that's your problem. But I'd like to know before I give you my (meaningless, I thought?) vote.

Rubio, a Cuban-American, made a comparison to the strategy employed by the Communist Party in Cuba where schools encouraged children to turn in parents who criticized Fidel Castro.

“Of course, I’m not equating the evolution people with Fidel Castro,” he quickly added, while noting that undermining the family and the church were key means the Communist Party used to gain control in Cuba.

“In order to impose their totalitarian regime, they destroyed the family; they destroyed the faith links that existed in that society,” he said.

Although the evolution issue is “obviously” on a “much smaller scale,” both matters are related to the “fundamental question of who is in charge of the upbringing of children. Is it parents or is it the government? I believe it’s parents. And we should do nothing in government that undermines that relationship.

“And there are parents that passionately believe in this and they should be given the opportunity to teach that to their children without someone undoing it,” Rubio said.

Is the Catholic Church the "Christian left" nowadays? Rubio is a Catholic. The Church teaches that the Bible is not incompatible with the Earth's age of 4.6 billion years. Period.

George Coyne: "Intelligent design isn't science even though it pretends to be. If you want to teach it in schools, intelligent design should be taught when religion or cultural history is taught, not science."

George Coyne, Jesuit priest, astronomer, and former director of the Vatican Observatory. Cite.

Comparatively speaking on this subject, yes. Outside of the hierarchy the Catholics are much less anti-science/anti-intellectualism than the evangelical Protestant right. About the only issue the hierarchy has managed to convert American Catholics on is procreative choice. (The Vatican and American bishops are crazy on that issue, of course.)

That secondary quote from Rubio is far more damning than the previous quote.

You think it's an accident the Republicans choose anti-science members to join science committees? That's where they can do the most damage. The Republican hate-America campaign isn't even trying to hide anymore.

You think it's an accident the Republicans choose anti-science members to join science committees? That's where they can do the most damage. The Republican hate-America campaign isn't even trying to hide anymore.

Presenting, lady and gentlemen, the voice of the open-minded, tolerant, dogma-free far left.

(Not you, Sammy - not having a creative, flexible mind isn't something I'd attribute to you, even when we're fihting).